Alex Knepper @ Race 4 2012:
Barack Obama is unique among American presidents in that he has spent his entire career successfully avoiding being directly questioned by a competent adversary from the opposing political party. In 2004, he faced only token opposition in his race for the Senate, and once elected he immediately ran for the presidency — against a man possessed by the idea that to take the nation’s probable first black president to task would be inappropriate. Obama walked into the other night’s debate with Mitt Romney with the same attitude that he brought to his battles with Alan Keyes and John McCain — against whom he could simply run out the clock with impunity.
In 2004, Barack Obama ran as a symbol: He represented future; he was The One, an exciting new figure for the next generation. He repeated this act at the national level in 2008, offering the famous hope-and-change routine to a nation weary after eight years of controversy and division under the Bush Administration. Obama’s presence on the stage against John McCain was an implicit proposition to America: Are you really going to let this guy get in the way of dynamic, generational change? John McCain wants to get in the way of this historical moment — Can you believe this guy? It was a role that McCain was all too willing to play.
In 2012, for the first time in his life (!), Barack Obama is an incumbent with a record. He can no longer live in the world of mere symbolism and potential. He has to deal with the realities of an unemployment rate he has failed to tame, inflation that can no longer be denied, deficits he has failed to control. Appeals to sentiment and symbolism alone are no longer an option. For once in his life, he must run on facts and figures — for once in his life, his opponent is the man who lives in the realm of potential. So what can Obama do? He can’t run on his record. He doesn’t have any new ideas. And he knows it: His body language oozed annoyance — How dare this man? How dare he not behave like John McCain? Can you believe this guy?
Response filed with original article—-see comment for previous article on FA.
Obama was soft-ball interviewed by the old lady of the View (Barbara Walters) in the WH one Christmas holiday season.
He was asked what he hated most about himself.
He said he tended to be lazy.
Obama’s last couple of years while president he has shown that to be true when it comes to taking the tough questions.
Obama has avoided tough give and takes for years.
He is completely out of practice facing a verbal OPPONENT instead of a verbal wiffle-ball pitcher.
Romney was as aware of this as any and all of us were.
We have all seen it.
We have commented on it.
Obama won’t take on issues against anyone who can stand on his own two feet!
Well, at the debate Obama had no choice.
Play time it truly over.
If Obama can buckle down and get to work, he can be a formidable candidate.
If he would rather go out and play, be worshiped by his uncritical masses and take more soft balls, he is toast.
I suspect the “Obama lost” meme may have been played up by the media simply because a good horse race keeps their audiences watching. They’ve got 30 days of ratings and advertising dollars to think about. It didn’t seem to me that either candidate could claim a clear victory after the first debate.
Greg Obama lost the debate. Whether he loses the election remains to be seen. 270 the #. Will still be decided in Ohio and Va. which will tighten in the polls.
BHO must decide how bad he wants 4 more years. He’s gotta step up big in the coming debates.Will he?? Personally,if he doesn’t show me big time he WANTS it, I’ll vote for Romney.
@Richard Wheeler, #4:
A lot of people share the opinion that Romney can claim a big win, and I’ll frankly admit to being puzzled. I was in the same situation following the first Bush/Kerry debate. I listened on the truck radio while out on the highway, was totally convinced Bush had made a horrible showing, and was astonished to find upon arriving at my destination that no one agreed with me.
I thought Romney’s entire approach was based on unfounded assertions and continuous evasions.
Greg Re the Kerry/Bush debate. Kerry won though moderately. This was 67-23. That’s a thumping. Obama’s body language suggested he didn’t want to be there. He was unprepared.
The good news is he gets another shot. R.R. lost debates and came back. He wanted it.Does BHO?
He can still win but the bar is now set higher.We’ll see what he’s made of in the next 30 days.
Semper Fi
Yet that inspired no personal insight or learning. What a shock.
For years we’ve been treated to Obama’s straw men.
Fallacies whereby Obama makes up his opponents’ position for them (usually a way out there one, too) then tears his own construct apart – proving what a clever boy he is.
But during the debate Obama tried the same thing…..over and over again.
Romney’s actual plans differ from Obama’s stump speech version of those plans, so Romney must be the liar.
Nope.
Straw men work best on an uninformed and uncritical audience.
Straw men do not work at all the way Obama tried to use them during the debate.
People are slowly awakening to the fact that Obama is mostly an empty suit. A vessel lefties have poured their hopes and dreams of equality of condition into.
The One is an affirmative action creation. His high school and college grades have to remain hidden…he was simply passed through…it was the liberal thing to do if you were his professor. He voted “present” through Illinois State Senate terms. He never faced a real opponent until now…they were all taken out for him. He’s in a tough school now…even with eighty-five percent of the media working for him.
We’ll see just how fooled the voters can be this time.